Pension eligibility spurs controversy

Last November, Mercer County Sheriff Kevin Larkin won a third term in office.

Then on Jan. 1, Larkin retired, and became eligible for an $85,000-per-year pension earned over nearly 27 years in public service.

But Larkin didn't leave his post.

Instead, Larkin was cashing in on a move allowed under the state's pension system: he can legally continue working as sheriff (at a $129,634 annual salary) while collecting a pension based on his "retirement" from that very job.

His political opponents have made hay of his decision, but when it comes to collecting public retirement benefits and a taxpayer-funded salary simultaneously, it is clear that the sheriff is not alone.

At least seven other high-ranking officials in Mercer County earn six-figure salaries in public jobs while also receiving retirement benefits from public pension funds, The Times has found.

All have long careers as public servants. Many risked their lives as policemen and firemen for decades. Their dual paychecks are not illegal, nor are their situations unique across this state.

Yet as the economy worsens and municipal, county, and state employees see their jobs at risk, many observers believe one public paycheck per person ought to be enough.

"If you're an employee, you should be paid. If you're retired, you should get your pension," state Sen. Bill Baroni, R-Hamilton, said when asked about the issue last week. "But not both."

Under Larkin in the county sheriff's office, which has 178 positions, The Times found three other top administrators earn a pension along with a salary in excess of $100,000 per year.

One, John Kemler, retired from his job as chief sheriff's officer on Jan. 1, then was rehired as chief warrant officer one month later.

His pension, based on salaries earned during the tail end of 27 years in public service, pays about $84,000 per year, while his new salary is $102,078.

Undersheriff Carolyn Walton, hired in Sept. 2007, earns $118,734 annually. She retired from Mercer County in 2002 after 27 years also collects a roughly $45,000 annual pension.

Undersheriff Dennis McMannimon, a veteran of the Princeton Borough police, is paid $118,734 annually along with a pension of about $84,000. He retired from the borough on Feb. 1, 2007, one month after being hired by the sheriff's office.

Then there are the civilian directors of Trenton's police and fire services.

Irving Bradley Jr., who earns $141,110 as the city's police director, retired from Newark's police force in 2006 and collects a pension of about $73,000 for 20 years on the job.

Trenton Fire Director Richard Laird was a city firefighter for 27 years before retiring in April 2008. He collects a $91,404 per-year pension for that service and a $132,346 salary in his current post.

Others outside the police and fire ranks have also come back to public jobs after retiring, including Hamilton business administrator John Ricci ($140,000 per-year salary and a $70,000 annual pension) and Barry Colicelli, a consultant who was promised about $72,000 through June by Trenton as part of a federally-funded program monitoring at risk-youth. Colicelli retired from Newark in 2004 and receives a $80,000 annual pension.

However common, such situations irk those who monitor state spending.

"If the person is retired, the person is retired," said Mary Forsberg, interim president of New Jersey Policy Perspective, a Trenton-based research group. "I think if they want to collect the pension, then they (should) collect a pension and not a salary. (Two checks) to me is not fair."

Michael Riccards, executive director of the Hall Institute of Public Policy, a Trenton-based think tank, agreed.

"The purpose of pension funds is to aid people who have retired and have a long and distinguished history of having served the state or the municipality, it's not meant to supplement your income," Riccards said, "if you want to retire from the state pension system and want more money, go into the private sector." He said the state's pension is already underfunded by billions of dollars because of an increasing gap between obligations and resources.

"I think that to say 'I will collect my pension and continue to get public money for a full-time job' is an abuse of the system," Riccards said.

But to some, the pensions are a benefit earned fairly, sometimes in the line of fire, and should not have any bearing on future employment. "As long as somebody abided by whatever the laws ... are, that's their option," said Bradley, the city police director. "If you earned it, I don't think a guy should be penalized for 25 years of public service if he wants to go into civilian service."

Some argue changing the system could also drive qualified employees away.

Several public servants interviewed for this story said they would have to re-evaluate their employment options if, for example, their pensions would be frozen if they took a public job after retiring.

"There are a lot of people that (during) 25 years have gained a lot of experience that have great resumes and have a lot of knowledge on a variety of aspects of whatever field they're in," said McMannimon, one of the Mercer County undersheriffs.

"I think what would happen is you would just go work in the private sector as opposed to the government and I think that would be government's loss," McMannimon said. "I was going to retire regardless ... I think the only difference is I'm hired now from the county" instead of the private sector.

Ricci, who left work in the private sector to come to Hamilton last June also said he would have had to re-evaluate his options if his pension were put at risk.

Bradley noted that public employees do contribute to their own pension funds through deductions from their publicly-funded paychecks. Larkin, Walton, Colicelli, Laird and Kemler could not be reached for comment last week.

State law requires police and firefighters to contribute up to 8.5 percent of base salary toward their pension fund, while members of the Public Employees Retirement System contribute 5.5 percent.

Governments who employ the workers also contribute to pension funds. Then the funds are invested. Ideally, that would create even more resources for retiring employees, though New Jersey's pension fund lost $23 billion last year and stands at $58.3 billion.